Non-ANE component of IRN_N/CHG?

[Billyh]

Hello,

I was wondering what you guys two cents is on the non-ANE component of Iran_N population. I don't see it being only ANE + Dzudzu. Basal-Rich K7 says Iran_N has more Basal ancestry than Barcin. The Dzudzuana study also says Iran_N cannot be modeled as Dzu+ANE, it needs a fairly sizable extra amount of "Deep" ancestry. In fact, it is modeled with more Deep (Mbuti) than Natufians are. In 'The genetic structure of the world’s first farmers' (Lazaridis et al., 2016), Iran_N is similarly modelled as more "Deep" than even Natufians (0.482 vs 0.448) and subsequently also AHG.

However, as far as I know, Iran_N does not have any particular affiliation with Ancient North Africans. As far as I see it, it can only be the case to me that the non-ANE part of this component did not originate from a Dzudzuana-like people. Iran_N is only modeled with Dzudzuana because we don't have one of these people yet, which is why it needs more "deep" ancestry than Dzudzuana.

So what is this component? Where did it come from? Where did Basal Eurasian come from? I am skeptical of the idea that IBM and Natufian can be explained only with Dzudzuana and ANA as well, but I am mostly puzzled with Iran_N. What are you guyses thoughts?

[Gentica277282]

Considering we have a Dzudzuana who is U6 why cant it be explained only with Dzudzuana and ANA. what is your thoughts on the said component within Natufians and IBM

[mauors]

I would guess as long as we have such utter lack of sampling from the paleolithic middle east one can only speculate based on archaeology that populations in situ were responsible for the key "mysterious" basal behavior of such populations i.e reduced affinity to wide set of pre neolithic populations from west and east Eurasia without increased affinity to Africans. After all, is there any reason to doubt that once the initial dispersal of proto-"Crown Eurasian" populations happened(simplifying a lot but you get the point), strains of Sapiens kept diverging in the middle eastern hub?

[Norfern-Ostrobothnian]

I think the Baradostians would fit this kind of population quite well.

[Aleph]

I think the Baradostians would fit this kind of population quite well.

Baradostians could be a possibility. The tail end of Baradostians are 20,000 years ago could be the last link between the non-ANE in Iran_N and CHG. Otherwise, the early Zarzian is another candidate.

[Billyh]

Baradostians could be a possibility. The tail end of Baradostians are 20,000 years ago could be the last link between the non-ANE in Iran_N and CHG. Otherwise, the early Zarzian is another candidate.

I believe Trialeti (CHG presumably) also descends from the Baradostian.

Probably a gradient from ANE to X (Baradostian?) with highest Baradostian in Zagros/Iran Plateau (Mesopotamia?), middling in Caucasus, and lowest in TTK (Tutkalian)

https://indo-european.eu/maps/epipalaeolithic/ This seems to have held up quite well

[Kunig]

Hello,

I was wondering what you guys two cents is on the non-ANE component of Iran_N population. I don't see it being only ANE + Dzudzu. Basal-Rich K7 says Iran_N has more Basal ancestry than Barcin. The Dzudzuana study also says Iran_N cannot be modeled as Dzu+ANE, it needs a fairly sizable extra amount of "Deep" ancestry. In fact, it is modeled with more Deep (Mbuti) than Natufians are. In 'The genetic structure of the world’s first farmers' (Lazaridis et al., 2016), Iran_N is similarly modelled as more "Deep" than even Natufians (0.482 vs 0.448) and subsequently also AHG.

However, as far as I know, Iran_N does not have any particular affiliation with Ancient North Africans. As far as I see it, it can only be the case to me that the non-ANE part of this component did not originate from a Dzudzuana-like people. Iran_N is only modeled with Dzudzuana because we don't have one of these people yet, which is why it needs more "deep" ancestry than Dzudzuana.

So what is this component? Where did it come from? Where did Basal Eurasian come from? I am skeptical of the idea that IBM and Natufian can be explained only with Dzudzuana and ANA as well, but I am mostly puzzled with Iran_N. What are you guyses thoughts?

I think indeed there is an unexplained link between Iran & North Africa

[Billyh]

I think indeed there is an unexplained link between Iran & North Africa

Iran_N/CHG rich pops such as Georgians, Iranians, Punjabis, seem to show not very much ANA compared to Natufian-rich pops (and remember, all these Iran_N related pops also have some Levant_PPNB already)

[Gentica277282]

Iran_N/CHG rich pops such as Georgians, Iranians, Punjabis, seem to show not very much ANA compared to Natufian-rich pops (and remember, all these Iran_N related pops also have some Levant_PPNB already)

So you think the deeper ancestry is enough to pull it that far away from Anf

[Billyh]

So you think the deeper ancestry is enough to pull it that far away from Anf

Extra deep + drift + maybe something else. I don't know if deep is the only difference, but I think extra deep is the only way to explain the Basal-heavy profile in Iran_N compared to Pinarbasi/Dzudzu when we know Iran_N is itself admixed significantly with an ANE type population that presumably had zero Basal.